UPTET News - BTC जिस जिलेे के अभ्यर्थी हैैं, उस जिलेे में वरीयता देंने की याचिका -
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10587 of 2018
Petitioner :- Avanish Kumar And 15 Others
Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi,Anil Kumar Singh Bishen,Tarun Agrawal
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashi Kant Verma
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Sri Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ-A No.10587 of 2018 submits as under:
(i) Those candidates who have passed B.T.C. from a particular district, should be given preference in appointment on the post of assistant teacher in that particular district.
(ii) The circular dated 20.12.2016 is contrary to Rule 14 of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 inasmuch as the applications may be invited from eligible candidates from the concerned districts.
Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare and Sri R.K. Ojha, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, learned counsels for the petitioners in other writ petitions, jointly submit that the petitioners belong to such district where there were no vacant posts. Therefore, they have a right to apply and accordingly they applied against the vacancies advertised in other districts. They were allowed to participate in the counselling and thereafter they were selected. Further, in a matter arising from the district Gonda, being Service Single No.11375 of 2018 (Ram Janak Maurya And Ors. vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Basic Education And Ors., an interim order dated 19.04.2018 was passed by Lucknow Bench of this Court directing the authority concerned not to issue appointment letters to candidates of different districts in which the post was advertised. They further submit that there is no bar under the Rules, 1981 that candidates of other districts may not apply against the vacancies advertised in a particular district.
In view of the interim order passed by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition relating to district Gonda, another Bench of this court in Writ-A No.12056 of 2018 (Abhishek Dixit And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others), passed an interim order dated 18.05.2018, as under:
"A statement is made by Shri Vivek Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, on the basis of the instructions received from the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad, that no appointment letters would be issued till the matter is pending before the Lucknow Bench in Special Appeal No. 205 of 2018 (Mohit Kumar Dwivedi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others), which is being heard on day-to-day basis.
In that view of the matter, let this writ petition be listed, along with the records of Writ A No. 10587 of 2018 (Avanish Kumar and 15 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others) and other connected matters, on 24th of May, 2018. "
The Special Appeal No.205 of 2018 which was the basis to pass afore-quoted interim order dated 18.05.2018, was disposed of by the Division Bench by order dated 25.05.2018, as under:
"The above three intra court appeals filed under Chapter-VIII, Rule-5 of the Rules of the Court have assailed the correctness of the interim order dated 19th April, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Service Single No.11375 of 2018 (Ram Janak Maurya and others Vs. State of U.P. and others). The interim order dated 19th April, 2018 is reproduced below:-
"Heard Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Notices for opposite party Nos.1 & 2 have been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel, whereas notices for opposite party Nos.3 & 4 have been accepted by Sri Vindhyavashini Kumar, learned counsel.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have submitted that the Basic Education Board, Allahabad and the District Basic Education Officer, Gonda be directed to prepare fresh cut off marks after first round of counselling by excluding the persons who had obtained B.T.C. Training from outside the District-Gonda and accordingly a fresh cut off of first round of counselling will be declared in pursuance of Government Orders dated 15.12.2018 and 11.04.2018 and the notification of the Basic Education Board dated 26.12.2016, 02.03.2017 and 16.04.2018 for appointment of 12,460 posts of Assistant Teachers by allowing only the persons who had completed B.T.C. Training from the District-Gonda only and outsiders to be allowed in subsequent rounds of counselling only as per policy of the State Government reflected in counter affidavit filed by it in Writ Petition No.10131 (M/B) of 2015; Om Prakash Singh & others vs. State of U.P.
As per learned counsel for the petitioners, the notification has been issued in the Newspaper dated 19.04.2018, whereby the date for verification of the original documents has been fixed for 23.04.2018 i.e. on Monday.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, as aforesaid, requires consideration.
Therefore, the competent authority is directed to verify the original documents of the candidates pursuant to the notification dated 18.04.2018, published in the Newspaper on 19.04.2018, but the appointment letter of the candidates, who obtained B.T.C. Training other than the District-Gonda shall not be issued, till the next date of listing and if it is required, it may be issued after seeking leave from the Court.
Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos.3 & 4 pray for and are granted two weeks' time to file their respective counter affidavits.
List this case in the week commencing 07.05.2018 as fresh along with other connected matters."
We have heard Sri Anil Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Durga Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants in Special Appeal No.205 of 2018, Dr. L.P. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in Special Appeal No.212 of 2018 and Sri Himanshu Raghav, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in Special Appeal No.206 of 2018, Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents in all the three appeals, Sri Gaurav Mehrotra and Ms. Ishita Yadu, learned counsel appearing for the intervenors- Siddharth Shukla and two others, Sri O.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Ram Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the intervenor- Alok Kumar Singh and Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel representing the U.P. Basic Education, Board and Sri Ramesh Pandey, learned Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The private respondents herein filed the Writ Petition No.11375 (S/S) of 2018 claiming the following reliefs:-
"Whereof, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to set-aside the judgment and order dated 19.04.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in Writ Petition No.11375 [S/S] of 2018- Ram Janak Maurya and others Vs. State of U.P. and others- and further the respondents 1 to 4 may be directed to issue the appointment letter to the appellant notwithstanding the impugned order dated 19.04.2018, or such other order which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed."
Before the learned Single Judge, the argument advanced was that the candidates from zero vacancy districts, although were permitted to give their first preference district for applying for appearing in the counseling for Assistant Teachers, they had done the B.T.C. training other than the District Gonda, cannot be equated to the petitioners therein, who had done their B.T.C.training from district-Gonda and the claim of the zero vacancy districts candidates would only be liable to be considered after the counseling of the petitioners who had done their B.T.C. from District-Gonda.
Reliance had been placed upon certain Rules framed under the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and relevant Government Orders in that regard.
The learned Single Judge, after noticing the arguments in brief, granted an interim order to the effect that the appointment letters to such candidates, who were from districts other than Gonda i.e. from the zero vacancy districts and had given their first preference for district Gonda, may not be issued till the next date of listing and further gave liberty that if it is required to be issued the same may be done only on seeking leave from the Court. The learned Single Judge had fixed 7th May, 2018 for the matter to be taken up as fresh, along with other connected matters and had also granted the respondents two weeks time to file their respective counter-affidavits.
Before us, learned counsels appearing for the appellants have raised the following arguments, firstly that the writ petition itself was not maintainable, inasmuch as, the petitioner therein had participated in the counseling, which was held in March, 2017 and after waiting for more than a year when they were found that they were lower in merit than the candidates from the zero vacancy district therein, and therefore the change in the stand after finding themselves unsuccessful would not be tenable in law as settled by various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and This Court.
Next argument raised was that the petitioners knowing fully well that the candidates from districts other than the Gonda i.e. zero vacancy districts who were higher in merit as against them, were not impleaded in the petition, as such, the petition was liable to be thrown out for non-joinder of necessary parties. Another argument raised was that the learned Single Judge did not record the basic ingredients required for passing an injunction order i.e. prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss, as such, the order passed by the learned Single Judge was vitiated. Plethora of judgments have been placed before us by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants on the above arguments raised.
On the other hand, learned counsels for the respondents have vehemently urged that the present Intra-Court appeals are not maintainable against an interim order and therefore they are liable to be dismissed. It is also submitted on behalf of the respondents that the learned Single Judge had only passed an interim order limited in duration and also granted liberty to apply for leave of the court in case the appointment orders of others were to be issued.
In our considered opinion, issues need to be first addressed by the learned Single Judge before we take up these matters in the intra court appellate jurisdiction. The Writ Court can always decide about it's jurisdiction to the maintainability of the petition and also for modifying or vacating the interim order.
Thus, we are not inclined to interfere in this Intra-Court appeals.
It would be open to the appellants to apply for impleadment, apply for vacation of the interim order, apply for modification of the interim order and raise all possible arguments, as may be permissible under law, before the learned Single Judge.
It is made clear that writ petitioners will not raise any objection before the learned Single Judge with regard to the impleadment of the candidates, who may be adversely affected by the outcome of the writ petition. We further request the learned Single Judge that in case stay vacation application, impleadment application or modification application, as the case may be, are filed by the appellants, the same may be taken up expeditiously and subject to other matters on Board, may be decided at the earliest.
With the above observations these appeals stand disposed of."
In view of the aforesaid, both the learned senior advocates submit that there is no legal impediment to hear and decide this batch of writ petitions finally.
Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General submits that U.P. Basic Education Board has taken a decision on 26.12.2016 that candidates of other districts shall also be permitted to participate in the counselling and they shall have a right to be appointed. He supports the said decision.
As prayed, put up in the Additional Cause List on 13.08.2018, along with all connected writ petitions.
Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General assures the court that till the next date fixed, the interest of the petitioners shall not be adversely affected by giving appointment to others.
Order Date :- 1.8.2018
NLY
UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,
CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET ,
Rajasthan TET / RTET, BETET / Bihar TET, PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10587 of 2018
Petitioner :- Avanish Kumar And 15 Others
Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi,Anil Kumar Singh Bishen,Tarun Agrawal
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashi Kant Verma
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Sri Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ-A No.10587 of 2018 submits as under:
(i) Those candidates who have passed B.T.C. from a particular district, should be given preference in appointment on the post of assistant teacher in that particular district.
(ii) The circular dated 20.12.2016 is contrary to Rule 14 of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 inasmuch as the applications may be invited from eligible candidates from the concerned districts.
Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare and Sri R.K. Ojha, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, learned counsels for the petitioners in other writ petitions, jointly submit that the petitioners belong to such district where there were no vacant posts. Therefore, they have a right to apply and accordingly they applied against the vacancies advertised in other districts. They were allowed to participate in the counselling and thereafter they were selected. Further, in a matter arising from the district Gonda, being Service Single No.11375 of 2018 (Ram Janak Maurya And Ors. vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Basic Education And Ors., an interim order dated 19.04.2018 was passed by Lucknow Bench of this Court directing the authority concerned not to issue appointment letters to candidates of different districts in which the post was advertised. They further submit that there is no bar under the Rules, 1981 that candidates of other districts may not apply against the vacancies advertised in a particular district.
In view of the interim order passed by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition relating to district Gonda, another Bench of this court in Writ-A No.12056 of 2018 (Abhishek Dixit And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others), passed an interim order dated 18.05.2018, as under:
"A statement is made by Shri Vivek Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, on the basis of the instructions received from the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad, that no appointment letters would be issued till the matter is pending before the Lucknow Bench in Special Appeal No. 205 of 2018 (Mohit Kumar Dwivedi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others), which is being heard on day-to-day basis.
In that view of the matter, let this writ petition be listed, along with the records of Writ A No. 10587 of 2018 (Avanish Kumar and 15 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others) and other connected matters, on 24th of May, 2018. "
The Special Appeal No.205 of 2018 which was the basis to pass afore-quoted interim order dated 18.05.2018, was disposed of by the Division Bench by order dated 25.05.2018, as under:
"The above three intra court appeals filed under Chapter-VIII, Rule-5 of the Rules of the Court have assailed the correctness of the interim order dated 19th April, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Service Single No.11375 of 2018 (Ram Janak Maurya and others Vs. State of U.P. and others). The interim order dated 19th April, 2018 is reproduced below:-
"Heard Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Notices for opposite party Nos.1 & 2 have been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel, whereas notices for opposite party Nos.3 & 4 have been accepted by Sri Vindhyavashini Kumar, learned counsel.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have submitted that the Basic Education Board, Allahabad and the District Basic Education Officer, Gonda be directed to prepare fresh cut off marks after first round of counselling by excluding the persons who had obtained B.T.C. Training from outside the District-Gonda and accordingly a fresh cut off of first round of counselling will be declared in pursuance of Government Orders dated 15.12.2018 and 11.04.2018 and the notification of the Basic Education Board dated 26.12.2016, 02.03.2017 and 16.04.2018 for appointment of 12,460 posts of Assistant Teachers by allowing only the persons who had completed B.T.C. Training from the District-Gonda only and outsiders to be allowed in subsequent rounds of counselling only as per policy of the State Government reflected in counter affidavit filed by it in Writ Petition No.10131 (M/B) of 2015; Om Prakash Singh & others vs. State of U.P.
As per learned counsel for the petitioners, the notification has been issued in the Newspaper dated 19.04.2018, whereby the date for verification of the original documents has been fixed for 23.04.2018 i.e. on Monday.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, as aforesaid, requires consideration.
Therefore, the competent authority is directed to verify the original documents of the candidates pursuant to the notification dated 18.04.2018, published in the Newspaper on 19.04.2018, but the appointment letter of the candidates, who obtained B.T.C. Training other than the District-Gonda shall not be issued, till the next date of listing and if it is required, it may be issued after seeking leave from the Court.
Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos.3 & 4 pray for and are granted two weeks' time to file their respective counter affidavits.
List this case in the week commencing 07.05.2018 as fresh along with other connected matters."
We have heard Sri Anil Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Durga Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants in Special Appeal No.205 of 2018, Dr. L.P. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in Special Appeal No.212 of 2018 and Sri Himanshu Raghav, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in Special Appeal No.206 of 2018, Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents in all the three appeals, Sri Gaurav Mehrotra and Ms. Ishita Yadu, learned counsel appearing for the intervenors- Siddharth Shukla and two others, Sri O.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Ram Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the intervenor- Alok Kumar Singh and Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel representing the U.P. Basic Education, Board and Sri Ramesh Pandey, learned Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The private respondents herein filed the Writ Petition No.11375 (S/S) of 2018 claiming the following reliefs:-
"Whereof, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to set-aside the judgment and order dated 19.04.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in Writ Petition No.11375 [S/S] of 2018- Ram Janak Maurya and others Vs. State of U.P. and others- and further the respondents 1 to 4 may be directed to issue the appointment letter to the appellant notwithstanding the impugned order dated 19.04.2018, or such other order which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed."
Before the learned Single Judge, the argument advanced was that the candidates from zero vacancy districts, although were permitted to give their first preference district for applying for appearing in the counseling for Assistant Teachers, they had done the B.T.C. training other than the District Gonda, cannot be equated to the petitioners therein, who had done their B.T.C.training from district-Gonda and the claim of the zero vacancy districts candidates would only be liable to be considered after the counseling of the petitioners who had done their B.T.C. from District-Gonda.
Reliance had been placed upon certain Rules framed under the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and relevant Government Orders in that regard.
The learned Single Judge, after noticing the arguments in brief, granted an interim order to the effect that the appointment letters to such candidates, who were from districts other than Gonda i.e. from the zero vacancy districts and had given their first preference for district Gonda, may not be issued till the next date of listing and further gave liberty that if it is required to be issued the same may be done only on seeking leave from the Court. The learned Single Judge had fixed 7th May, 2018 for the matter to be taken up as fresh, along with other connected matters and had also granted the respondents two weeks time to file their respective counter-affidavits.
Before us, learned counsels appearing for the appellants have raised the following arguments, firstly that the writ petition itself was not maintainable, inasmuch as, the petitioner therein had participated in the counseling, which was held in March, 2017 and after waiting for more than a year when they were found that they were lower in merit than the candidates from the zero vacancy district therein, and therefore the change in the stand after finding themselves unsuccessful would not be tenable in law as settled by various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and This Court.
Next argument raised was that the petitioners knowing fully well that the candidates from districts other than the Gonda i.e. zero vacancy districts who were higher in merit as against them, were not impleaded in the petition, as such, the petition was liable to be thrown out for non-joinder of necessary parties. Another argument raised was that the learned Single Judge did not record the basic ingredients required for passing an injunction order i.e. prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss, as such, the order passed by the learned Single Judge was vitiated. Plethora of judgments have been placed before us by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants on the above arguments raised.
On the other hand, learned counsels for the respondents have vehemently urged that the present Intra-Court appeals are not maintainable against an interim order and therefore they are liable to be dismissed. It is also submitted on behalf of the respondents that the learned Single Judge had only passed an interim order limited in duration and also granted liberty to apply for leave of the court in case the appointment orders of others were to be issued.
In our considered opinion, issues need to be first addressed by the learned Single Judge before we take up these matters in the intra court appellate jurisdiction. The Writ Court can always decide about it's jurisdiction to the maintainability of the petition and also for modifying or vacating the interim order.
Thus, we are not inclined to interfere in this Intra-Court appeals.
It would be open to the appellants to apply for impleadment, apply for vacation of the interim order, apply for modification of the interim order and raise all possible arguments, as may be permissible under law, before the learned Single Judge.
It is made clear that writ petitioners will not raise any objection before the learned Single Judge with regard to the impleadment of the candidates, who may be adversely affected by the outcome of the writ petition. We further request the learned Single Judge that in case stay vacation application, impleadment application or modification application, as the case may be, are filed by the appellants, the same may be taken up expeditiously and subject to other matters on Board, may be decided at the earliest.
With the above observations these appeals stand disposed of."
In view of the aforesaid, both the learned senior advocates submit that there is no legal impediment to hear and decide this batch of writ petitions finally.
Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General submits that U.P. Basic Education Board has taken a decision on 26.12.2016 that candidates of other districts shall also be permitted to participate in the counselling and they shall have a right to be appointed. He supports the said decision.
As prayed, put up in the Additional Cause List on 13.08.2018, along with all connected writ petitions.
Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General assures the court that till the next date fixed, the interest of the petitioners shall not be adversely affected by giving appointment to others.
Order Date :- 1.8.2018
NLY
UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,
CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET ,
Rajasthan TET / RTET, BETET / Bihar TET, PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
No comments:
Post a Comment
To All,
Please do not use abusive languages in Anger.
Write your comment Wisely, So that other Visitors/Readers can take it Seriously.
Thanks.